Harvesters Ministries
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 813261157
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Fort Mill, SC, USA
- Phone
- 9803282055
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,061,763
- Expenses
- $4,518,357
- Assets
- $1,352,828
- Liabilities
- $2,344
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEVEN LOOTS (CEO, FOUNDER, BOARD CHAIR)
Highest reported compensation
- DAVID WITMER (V.P. OF ADMINISTRATION,/ B): $91,455 total reported compensation
- STEVEN LOOTS (CEO, FOUNDER, BOARD CHAIR): $54,181 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Harvesters ministries is a global church planting ministry, whose mission is to open the way for the world to know jesus with a vision to plant 1 million churches through evangelism and be discipling 100 million believers by 2030, and to have trained 1 million new pastors by 2033.
What it reported doing in 2024
Training of hub-leader pastors in evangelism, disciple-making, church planting and pastor training: harvesters utilizes a proprietary hub-church planting model and works through national pastors already in place. Countries are identified, and current pastors are invited to learn about and participate in being trained in evangelism and church-planting methods including the hub-church planting model. They create a plan to initiate and coordinate the systematic and strategic planting of churches within a day's walk or bicycle ride of their hub-church. This incorporates evangelism using the heart of man poster series. Regions: central and south america, africa, asia, europe
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 60
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 75.7%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 84.8%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 95.3%; rating input score 95; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 61.5%; rating input score 62; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.7%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 23.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 23.6% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 28.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 75.7% of revenue deployed · 84.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $91K · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.